Anatomical, behavioral, and cognitive teratogenicity associated with valproic acid: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Recent guidance from UK health authorities strongly cautions against the use of valproic acid (VPA) in persons under 55 because of reevaluated risk of teratogenicity. Objective To summarize the extant literature documenting VPA-associated anatomical, behavioral, and cognitive teratogenicity. Method Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Collected data covered study design, participant characteristics, anatomical, behavioral, or cognitive effects, and folic acid outcomes. Results 122 studies were identified meeting inclusion comprised of studies evaluating anatomical (n = 67), behavioral (n = 28), and cognitive (n = 47) teratogenicity. Twenty studies were identified reporting on the risk mitigation effects of folic acid supplementation. Prenatal VPA exposure is associated with anatomical teratogenicity including major congenital malformations (odds ratio [OR] 2.47–9.30; p < 0.005). Behavioral teratogenicity including autism (OR 1.70–4.38), impaired motor development (OR 7.0), and ADHD (OR 1.39) are also significantly associated with VPA exposure. VPA was associated with intellectual disability and low IQ (hazard ratio [HR] 2.4–4.48, verbal intelligence: Spearman’s ρ = −0.436, respectively). Teratogenic effects were dose-dependent across all domains and were significant when compared with controls and other antiepileptic drugs (eg, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam). Folic acid supplementation does not significantly reduce the hazard associated with VPA. Conclusions VPA is significantly associated with anatomical, behavioral, and cognitive teratogenicity. Folic acid supplementation does not abrogate the risk of teratogenicity associated with VPA exposure. Available evidence supports recommendations to reduce VPA exposure in women of reproductive age.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".